That 16/2.8 WR - I don't get it: It's not much smaller than the really great 16/1.4 and two stops slower. Faster AF? Weather resistance - and again water damage excluded in warranty? The WR lenses mostly are sharp and relying on distortion correction.I wonder if that's what people wanted?

(07-22-2018, 11:41 AM)JJ_SO Wrote: That 16/2.8 WR - I don't get it: It's not much smaller than the really great 16/1.4 and two stops slower. Faster AF? Weather resistance - and again water damage excluded in warranty? The WR lenses mostly are sharp and relying on distortion correction.I wonder if that's what people wanted?

So it's not a pancake like the Sony / Samsung lenses with the same stats? Odd.

It seems to me that there is unreasonable excitement about mirrorless lenses lately. Size, weight, price are far from what was predicted. The engineers do nail the objectives here and there but overall that is not the case. We've seen it with Fuji Sony and now Oly.